At 64 I suspect that he isn’t eligible for a Darwin Award ...
I didn't realise that there are qualifications or conditions other than death through heroic (or naive) misadventure. Do tell.
It's an award for people removing their stupidity genes from the pool. At 64 he's past breeding age.
One of my pet peeves is that the children of the second marriage of my ancestor Francis Funge (1618-1701, Waddesdon, Bucks) are wrongly attributed by many people to his son, also Francis Funge (1648-1717).
Francis the elder's first wife died in 1677. 14 months later, not long before his 60th birthday, Francis married Jane Carter, age not recorded & birth not yet found. They had at least two children, because two daughters are mentioned in his will who can't possibly be from his first marriage: Ann (my ancestor, married 1698 the same day as she was christened, aged 19, with both parents named, & her father called "Francis Snr"), & Mary "my youngest daughter).
Ann keeps getting listed in family trees online as a daughter of Francis the younger, apparently because the idea of a 60 year old 17th century manual worker fathering children is thought too improbable to give credence to, whatever the evidence.
Just one more, less extreme, example to add to the others given here.
PS. I've identified two of my ancestors who had 16 pregnancies: one had 19 children.
